Revisiting Social Construction of Knowledge in Asynchronous Computer Mediated Communications (CMC): What to Change

Abstract

This study focuses on social construction of knowledge in asynchronous online forum discussions. Social construction of knowledge and how to analyze the quality of interaction during computer mediated communications (CMC) were studied for decades. Interaction Analysis Model (IAM) is one of the mostly used models for determining the quality of CMC. The author also used IAM while analyzing the content of CMC activities in the past. In this study, the same analysis of CMC was conducted again with different participants and discussion topics in order to see what changes in the current study if the voluntary/mandatory participation to discussions, prior interpersonal familiarity, moderating behavior during the CMC, and discussion technique change, comparing to previous study of the author. The aim of this paper is to identify the levels of social construction of knowledge in CMC of the postgraduate students of a university in Turkey. The data of this case study is composed of CMC messages and views of the participants written on an anonymous open-ended questionnaire. Quantitative content analysis and thematic analysis were conducted on the data set. The analysis of the messages by IAM of this case study gave slightly better results than the previous study of the author, and some suggestions were put forward for the future research.

Keywords

• Social construction of knowledge,computer mediated communications (CMC),online discussions,interaction analysis model (IAM)

References

1. Adams, S. J., Roch, D. G., & Ayman, R. (2005). Communication Medium and Member Familiarity: The Effects on Decision Time, Accuracy, and Satisfaction. Small Group Research, 36(3), 321-353. DOI:10.1177/1046496405275232.
2. Arbaugh, J. B., & Benbunan-Fich, R. (2007). The importance of participant interaction in online environment. Decision Support Systems, 43, 853-865. DOI: 10.1016/j.dss.2006.12.013.
3. Çardak, Ç. S. (2016). Increasing teacher candidates' ways of interaction and levels of learning through action research in a blended course. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 488-506. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.055.
4. Fung, Y. Y. H. (2004). Collaborative online learning: interaction patterns and limiting factors. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and eLearning. 19(2), 135-149. DOI: 10.1080/0268051042000224743.
5. Gomez, D. R. (2018). Analyzing Social Construction of Knowledge and Social Networks in Online Discussion Forums in Spanish. Unpublished PhD Thesis. University of New Mexico. Retrieved from https://digitalrepository.unm.edu/oils_etds/52 on 2.
6. Gunawardena, C. N., Lowe, C. A., & Anderson, T. (1997). Analysis of a global online debate and the development of an interaction analysis model for examining social construction of knowledge in computer conferencing. J. Educational Computing Research, 17(4), 397-431. DOI:10.2190/7MQV-X9UJ-C7Q3-NRAG.
7. Gunawardena, C. N. & Zittle, F. J. (1997) Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment, American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26. DOI:10.1080/08923649709526970.
8. Gupta, K.A. and Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 24 (4), 473-496.

9. Heo, H., Lim, K.-Y., & Kim, Y. (2010). Exploratory study on the patterns of online interaction and knowledge co-construction in project-based learning. Computers & Education 55, 1383–1392. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.012.
10. Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2011). Student facilitators’’ habits of mind and their influences on higher-level knowledge construction occurrences in online discussions: a case study. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 48(3), 275-285. DOI:10.1080/14703297.2011.593704.
11. Hou, H.-T., Chang, K.-E. & Sung, Y.-T. (2008). Analysis of Problem-Solving-Based Online Asynchronous Discussion Pattern. Educational Technology & Society, 11 (1), 17-28.
12. Hou, H.-T., Chang, K.-E., & Sung, Y.-T. (2009). Using blogs as a professional development tool for teachers : Analysis of interaction behavioral patterns. Interactive Learning Environments, 17(4), 325-340.
13. Johnson, G. M. (2006). Synchronous and Asynchronous Text-Based CMC in Educational Contexts: A Review of Recent Research. TechTrends, 50(4), 46-53. DOI: 10.1007/s11528-006-0046-9.
14. La Pointe, D. K., & Gunawardena, C. N. (2004). Developing, testingand refining of a model to understand the relationship between peer interaction and learning outcomes in computer‐mediated conferencing. Distance Education, 25(1), 83-106. DOI:10.1080/0158791042000212477.
15. Lang, Q. C. (2010). Analysing high school students’ participation and interaction in an asynchronous online project-based learning environment. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 26(3), 327-340.
16. Lin, J. & Huff, S. L. (1988). Efficiency in computer mediated negotiation: The familiarity factor. ASAC Conference. Halifax, Nova Skotia. DOI: 10.20381/ruor-2263.
17. Lu, L. F. L., & Jeng, I. (2006). Knowledge construction in inservice teacher online discourse. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 39(2), 183-202. DOI:10.1080/15391523.2006.10782479.
18. Lucas, M., Gunawardena C., & Moreira, A. (2014). Assessing social construction of knowledge online: A critique of the interaction analysis model. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 524-582. DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.050.
19. Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education. 3(2).
20. Paulus, T. M. (2007). CMC modes for learning tasks at a distance. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1322-1345. DOI: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00375.x.
21. Rovai, A. P., & Barnum, K. T. (2003). On-line course effectiveness: An analysis of student interactions and perceptions of learning. Journal of Distance Education, 18(1), 57-73. Retrieved from http://www.ijede.ca/index.php/jde/article/view/121/102
22. Savignon, S. J. & Roithmeier, W. (2004). Computer-mediated Communication: Texts and Strategies. CALICO Journal, 21, (2), 265-290. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/24149395
23. Sher, A. (2009). Assessing the relationship of student-instructor and student-student interaction to student learning and satisfaction in web-based online learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 8(2), 102-120. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/8.2.1.pdf
24. So, H. J. (2009). When groups decide to use asynchronous online discussions: collaborative learning and social presence under a voluntary participation structure. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 143–160. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2008.00293.x
25. Su, B., Bonk, C., Magjuka, R. J., Liu, X., & Lee, S. (2005). The importance of interaction in web-based education: Aprogram level case study of online MBA courses. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 4(1), 1-18. Retrieved from http://www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/pdf/4.1.1.pdf
26. Tan, J., Chai, S. C., & Hong, H. Y. (2008). The analysis of small group knowledge building effort among teachers using an Interaction Analysis Model. In Computers in Education (pp. 801-808).
27. Thompson, E. W. & Savenye, W. C. (2007) Adult Learner Participation in an Online Degree Program: A program‐level study of voluntary computer‐mediated communication. Distance Education, 28(3), 299-312. DOI: 10.1080/01587910701611336
28. Tu, C. H. (2000). On-line learning migration: from social learning theory to social presence theory in a CMC environment. Journal of Network and Computer Applications. 23, 27–37 DOI:10.1006/jnca.1999.0099.
29. Tu, C. H. (2002). The Impacts of Text-based CMC on Online Social Presence. The Journal of Interactive Online Learning. 1(2), 1-24.
30. Tu, C. H. & McIsaac, M. (2002). The Relationship of Social Presence and Interaction in Online Classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131-150. DOI: 10.1207/S15389286AJDE1603_2.
31. Yanlin, Z., Luyi, L. &, Fanglin, Z. (2010). Social Context for Computer-supported Collaborative Learning. International Conference on Networking and Digital Society. Retrieved from https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5479204
32. Zhao, C., Liang, Y. & Liu, Q. (2016). Analysis of Social Network and Knowledge Construction Levels in Online Discussion. International Conference on Educational Innovation through Technology. DOI: 10.1109/EITT.2016.39 , pp. 163-167.